Are you SURE you don't want healthcare for the poor?
Replies
-
I didn't need to sell anything to make ends meet. We had plenty in savings. My point was that we qualified for WIC because my husband was sent to war. Frankly, the fact that you think that someone whose spouse is sent to war should dress in rags, drive a clunker, and not own anything nice rather than get $30/month in government aid is rather character defining as well. FTR, the car was bought brand new 2 1/2 years earlier and was paid for (hubby worked for the company so we got it cheaper than the same model used would have been.) The clothes were bought at garage sales, Goodwill, etc. The jewelry was bought when I was single and managed a jewelry dept in college for 1/2 off or more from retail prices. Even though we are well off that doesn't mean I'm not frugal.Wed 07/11/12 10:28 AM
I thought this was a 'friendly' debate site... Calling someone an idiot for her beliefs is character defining, in my opinion, as is using WIC when you drive a nice car with nice clothes and jewelry. Sell the car and get a cheaper one, sell the jewelry (aside from the sentimental), and consign your nice clothes to pay for things if you have to. I speak from experience as one who works as a teacher and whose husband earns upper middle class income. I have a chronic illness with 'good' medical insurance and sometimes have to do without to pay for the ongoing medical bills. People don't want to sacrifice, and seem to think they have a right to things they can't afford. It's pretty pathetic.
I don't think that about those who are sent to war. My point is exactly as I stated; nothing more.0 -
I think the US should have a military and a police force, but I don't want to pay for that, either. My taxes always have.
This makes me laugh since that's the one of the few things that the constitution actually allows the government to do.
National Government powers
Print money
Regulate interstate (between states) and international trade
Make treaties and conduct foreign policy
Declare war
Provide an army and navy
Establish post offices
Make laws necessary and proper to carry out the these power
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_powers_does_the_national_government_have_under_the_constitution_Which_powers_belong_to_the_states_Which_powers_are_shared#ixzz20X2HvBjs0 -
True, but the fact that someone wrote down somewhere that this is okay for the government to do doesn't impress me at all. I'm not concerned with the Constitution or law (especially since I've seen both thoroughly ignored and corrupted). I'm concerned with what is good for society right now.I think the US should have a military and a police force, but I don't want to pay for that, either. My taxes always have.
This makes me laugh since that's the one of the few things that the constitution actually allows the government to do.
National Government powers
Print money
Regulate interstate (between states) and international trade
Make treaties and conduct foreign policy
Declare war
Provide an army and navy
Establish post offices
Make laws necessary and proper to carry out the these power
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_powers_does_the_national_government_have_under_the_constitution_Which_powers_belong_to_the_states_Which_powers_are_shared#ixzz20X2HvBjs
Edit: And the thing which really should have been my main point and maybe only point is this:
What the laws are don't matter. They can and should be changed to better serve the people of the society that made them. We can agree or disagree on what laws will accomplish that, but it doesn't matter at all what the laws are now. Law should serve us, not the other way around.0 -
I'd hate to live in a developing country like the USA.
If you want a good healthcare system (cheaper & better performing) I'd suggest looking at France.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_France
The French health care system is one of universal health care largely financed by government national health insurance. In its 2000 assessment of world health care systems, the World Health Organization found that France provided the "best overall health care" in the world. In 2005, France spent 11.2% of GDP on health care, or US$3,926 per capita, a figure much higher than the average spent by countries in Europe but less than in the US. Approximately 77% of health expenditures are covered by government funded agencies.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_health_care_systems_in_Canada_and_the_United_States
So in 2005 the US was paying $6,500 per capita for care & France paying $3,926 per capita for care AND getting a higher quality service for all (including the poor).0 -
Yes, I'm sure. I'd rather keep the money I work for.0
-
Bump0
-
True, but the fact that someone wrote down somewhere that this is okay for the government to do doesn't impress me at all. I'm not concerned with the Constitution or law (especially since I've seen both thoroughly ignored and corrupted). I'm concerned with what is good for society right now.I think the US should have a military and a police force, but I don't want to pay for that, either. My taxes always have.
This makes me laugh since that's the one of the few things that the constitution actually allows the government to do.
National Government powers
Print money
Regulate interstate (between states) and international trade
Make treaties and conduct foreign policy
Declare war
Provide an army and navy
Establish post offices
Make laws necessary and proper to carry out the these power
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_powers_does_the_national_government_have_under_the_constitution_Which_powers_belong_to_the_states_Which_powers_are_shared#ixzz20X2HvBjs
....
That's the reason our country is failing no one cares about the Constitution or Existing law. It doesn't impress you? #societyfail0 -
True, but the fact that someone wrote down somewhere that this is okay for the government to do doesn't impress me at all. I'm not concerned with the Constitution or law (especially since I've seen both thoroughly ignored and corrupted). I'm concerned with what is good for society right now.I think the US should have a military and a police force, but I don't want to pay for that, either. My taxes always have.
This makes me laugh since that's the one of the few things that the constitution actually allows the government to do.
National Government powers
Print money
Regulate interstate (between states) and international trade
Make treaties and conduct foreign policy
Declare war
Provide an army and navy
Establish post offices
Make laws necessary and proper to carry out the these power
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_powers_does_the_national_government_have_under_the_constitution_Which_powers_belong_to_the_states_Which_powers_are_shared#ixzz20X2HvBjs
....
That's the reason our country is failing no one cares about the Constitution or Existing law. It doesn't impress you? #societyfail
Why should anyone respect any law unless it is:
1. A good law.
2. Applied equally to everyone both in theory and practice.
Laws and Constitutions have permitted and even encouraged slavery, genocide, bigotry, and just about every other evil I can think of.
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.0 -
True, but the fact that someone wrote down somewhere that this is okay for the government to do doesn't impress me at all. I'm not concerned with the Constitution or law (especially since I've seen both thoroughly ignored and corrupted). I'm concerned with what is good for society right now.I think the US should have a military and a police force, but I don't want to pay for that, either. My taxes always have.
This makes me laugh since that's the one of the few things that the constitution actually allows the government to do.
National Government powers
Print money
Regulate interstate (between states) and international trade
Make treaties and conduct foreign policy
Declare war
Provide an army and navy
Establish post offices
Make laws necessary and proper to carry out the these power
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_powers_does_the_national_government_have_under_the_constitution_Which_powers_belong_to_the_states_Which_powers_are_shared#ixzz20X2HvBjs
....
That's the reason our country is failing no one cares about the Constitution or Existing law. It doesn't impress you? #societyfail
Why should anyone respect any law unless it is:
1. A good law.
2. Applied equally to everyone both in theory and practice.
Laws and Constitutions have permitted and even encouraged slavery, genocide, bigotry, and just about every other evil I can think of.
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
Well good! Those types of people cost too much anyway. And if they don't contribute to society (work, pay taxes), they should go away.0 -
True, but the fact that someone wrote down somewhere that this is okay for the government to do doesn't impress me at all. I'm not concerned with the Constitution or law (especially since I've seen both thoroughly ignored and corrupted). I'm concerned with what is good for society right now.I think the US should have a military and a police force, but I don't want to pay for that, either. My taxes always have.
This makes me laugh since that's the one of the few things that the constitution actually allows the government to do.
National Government powers
Print money
Regulate interstate (between states) and international trade
Make treaties and conduct foreign policy
Declare war
Provide an army and navy
Establish post offices
Make laws necessary and proper to carry out the these power
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_powers_does_the_national_government_have_under_the_constitution_Which_powers_belong_to_the_states_Which_powers_are_shared#ixzz20X2HvBjs
....
That's the reason our country is failing no one cares about the Constitution or Existing law. It doesn't impress you? #societyfail
Why should anyone respect any law unless it is:
1. A good law.
2. Applied equally to everyone both in theory and practice.
Laws and Constitutions have permitted and even encouraged slavery, genocide, bigotry, and just about every other evil I can think of.
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
Well good! Those types of people cost too much anyway. And if they don't contribute to society (work, pay taxes), they should go away.
And by that you mean they should die. Well at least you're honest. Funny thing about humans, given a choice between killing or dying a lot of them will choose to kill. Which is probably why our society as a whole likes pretending that isn't the prevailing attitude. But people are starting to catch on more and more. And then let there be war.0 -
True, but the fact that someone wrote down somewhere that this is okay for the government to do doesn't impress me at all. I'm not concerned with the Constitution or law (especially since I've seen both thoroughly ignored and corrupted). I'm concerned with what is good for society right now.I think the US should have a military and a police force, but I don't want to pay for that, either. My taxes always have.
This makes me laugh since that's the one of the few things that the constitution actually allows the government to do.
National Government powers
Print money
Regulate interstate (between states) and international trade
Make treaties and conduct foreign policy
Declare war
Provide an army and navy
Establish post offices
Make laws necessary and proper to carry out the these power
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_powers_does_the_national_government_have_under_the_constitution_Which_powers_belong_to_the_states_Which_powers_are_shared#ixzz20X2HvBjs
....
That's the reason our country is failing no one cares about the Constitution or Existing law. It doesn't impress you? #societyfail
Why should anyone respect any law unless it is:
1. A good law.
2. Applied equally to everyone both in theory and practice.
Laws and Constitutions have permitted and even encouraged slavery, genocide, bigotry, and just about every other evil I can think of.
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
Well good! Those types of people cost too much anyway. And if they don't contribute to society (work, pay taxes), they should go away.
And by that you mean they should die. Well at least you're honest. Funny thing about humans, given a choice between killing or dying a lot of them will choose to kill. Which is probably why our society as a whole likes pretending that isn't the prevailing attitude. But people are starting to catch on more and more. And then let there be war.
Mara, read Marker by Robin Cook (if you haven't already). He writes medical thrillers, but he's a physician and there are facts behind the fiction. But it brings genetic testing into a whole new light.0 -
True, but the fact that someone wrote down somewhere that this is okay for the government to do doesn't impress me at all. I'm not concerned with the Constitution or law (especially since I've seen both thoroughly ignored and corrupted). I'm concerned with what is good for society right now.I think the US should have a military and a police force, but I don't want to pay for that, either. My taxes always have.
This makes me laugh since that's the one of the few things that the constitution actually allows the government to do.
National Government powers
Print money
Regulate interstate (between states) and international trade
Make treaties and conduct foreign policy
Declare war
Provide an army and navy
Establish post offices
Make laws necessary and proper to carry out the these power
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_powers_does_the_national_government_have_under_the_constitution_Which_powers_belong_to_the_states_Which_powers_are_shared#ixzz20X2HvBjs
....
That's the reason our country is failing no one cares about the Constitution or Existing law. It doesn't impress you? #societyfail
Why should anyone respect any law unless it is:
1. A good law.
2. Applied equally to everyone both in theory and practice.
Laws and Constitutions have permitted and even encouraged slavery, genocide, bigotry, and just about every other evil I can think of.
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
Well good! Those types of people cost too much anyway. And if they don't contribute to society (work, pay taxes), they should go away.
And by that you mean they should die. Well at least you're honest. Funny thing about humans, given a choice between killing or dying a lot of them will choose to kill. Which is probably why our society as a whole likes pretending that isn't the prevailing attitude. But people are starting to catch on more and more. And then let there be war.
Mara, read Marker by Robin Cook (if you haven't already). He writes medical thrillers, but he's a physician and there are facts behind the fiction. But it brings genetic testing into a whole new light.
I haven't read anything by him, but I suppose I should, I need more nightmares about the horrible things humanity is likely to do with genetic technology instead of the wonderful things our species needs to be doing with it.0 -
True, but the fact that someone wrote down somewhere that this is okay for the government to do doesn't impress me at all. I'm not concerned with the Constitution or law (especially since I've seen both thoroughly ignored and corrupted). I'm concerned with what is good for society right now.I think the US should have a military and a police force, but I don't want to pay for that, either. My taxes always have.
This makes me laugh since that's the one of the few things that the constitution actually allows the government to do.
National Government powers
Print money
Regulate interstate (between states) and international trade
Make treaties and conduct foreign policy
Declare war
Provide an army and navy
Establish post offices
Make laws necessary and proper to carry out the these power
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_powers_does_the_national_government_have_under_the_constitution_Which_powers_belong_to_the_states_Which_powers_are_shared#ixzz20X2HvBjs
....
That's the reason our country is failing no one cares about the Constitution or Existing law. It doesn't impress you? #societyfail
Why should anyone respect any law unless it is:
1. A good law.
2. Applied equally to everyone both in theory and practice.
Laws and Constitutions have permitted and even encouraged slavery, genocide, bigotry, and just about every other evil I can think of.
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
Well good! Those types of people cost too much anyway. And if they don't contribute to society (work, pay taxes), they should go away.
And by that you mean they should die. Well at least you're honest. Funny thing about humans, given a choice between killing or dying a lot of them will choose to kill. Which is probably why our society as a whole likes pretending that isn't the prevailing attitude. But people are starting to catch on more and more. And then let there be war.
Mara, read Marker by Robin Cook (if you haven't already). He writes medical thrillers, but he's a physician and there are facts behind the fiction. But it brings genetic testing into a whole new light.
I haven't read anything by him, but I suppose I should, I need more nightmares about the horrible things humanity is likely to do with genetic technology instead of the wonderful things our species needs to be doing with it.
That's the problem. Do you think we will use this knowledge for the greater good? I don't. I think it will be used against us in the end. Humanity doesn't exist. I used to believe in it, but not anymore.0 -
I have an idea for a thriller. Obama enlists the NIH to genetically engineer a population of even hungrier, lazier, and more sickly poor people to drain your hard-earned money. Our only hope is Rush Limbaugh and the NRA's army of patriots!0
-
The way I see it, we have 3 choices:
Make the minimum wage a true living wage
Continue to pay higher taxes for the working poor to go to free clinics and the ER for care
Cut off care and pay for more riot police and prisons as the working poor revolt
And even if you pick 'make the minimum wage a living wage' you still have to worry about people who are unemployed and need healthcare.
Minimum wage was never intended to be living wage. They are very different things. Minimum wage is supposed to be the minimum to maintain the very basic living standards of food and shelter. It isn't to guarantee health insurance, steak dinners, car ownership, fancy cell phones, pets, multiple children, etc. It is supposed to be just enough to live.0 -
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
I would love to see the study/research behind this statistic. I would venture to say this is a result of other risk factors/life choices commonly shared among those who do not carry insurance (regardless of the reason). I find it hard to believe that care for a single incident alone is so inferior for those without health insurance they are 50% more likely to die.0 -
double post.0
-
The way I see it, we have 3 choices:
Make the minimum wage a true living wage
Continue to pay higher taxes for the working poor to go to free clinics and the ER for care
Cut off care and pay for more riot police and prisons as the working poor revolt
And even if you pick 'make the minimum wage a living wage' you still have to worry about people who are unemployed and need healthcare.
Minimum wage was never intended to be living wage. They are very different things. Minimum wage is supposed to be the minimum to maintain the very basic living standards of food and shelter. It isn't to guarantee health insurance, steak dinners, car ownership, fancy cell phones, pets, multiple children, etc. It is supposed to be just enough to live.
You just defined a living wage in the same statement where you said minimum wage was never intended to be a living wage. Odd.
What a low minimum wage does is enable some companies to use the government to provide the benefits that they would otherwise need to provide. Meaning that they can pay minimum wage to part time employees and then the government assistance will then fill in the gaps so those employees can survive and spend their government assistance at their stores.0 -
A living wage is meant to be able to pay for things like health insurance, cars, phones, etc. Basically, the initial intent of minimum wage was to give a 'fair' amount of pay to people in menial jobs that didn't have backing of stronger groups of people like unions that could barter for fair wages. It wasn't intended to be something that someone could raise a family on, pay for education, insurance, home ownership, car ownership, etc.The way I see it, we have 3 choices:
Make the minimum wage a true living wage
Continue to pay higher taxes for the working poor to go to free clinics and the ER for care
Cut off care and pay for more riot police and prisons as the working poor revolt
And even if you pick 'make the minimum wage a living wage' you still have to worry about people who are unemployed and need healthcare.
Minimum wage was never intended to be living wage. They are very different things. Minimum wage is supposed to be the minimum to maintain the very basic living standards of food and shelter. It isn't to guarantee health insurance, steak dinners, car ownership, fancy cell phones, pets, multiple children, etc. It is supposed to be just enough to live.
You just defined a living wage in the same statement where you said minimum wage was never intended to be a living wage. Odd.
What a low minimum wage does is enable some companies to use the government to provide the benefits that they would otherwise need to provide. Meaning that they can pay minimum wage to part time employees and then the government assistance will then fill in the gaps so those employees can survive and spend their government assistance at their stores.
I'm not arguing that someone working 30-40 hours a week shouldn't be able to expect at least some standard of living. Minimum wage wasn't set up to guarantee that.
As far as the health insurance/health care debate goes, I don't think everyone should automatically assume that they should get all care. I think that all children should have full coverage, disabled, and anyone with long term or chronic illnesses, and any honorably discharged veteran should automatically have coverage. Does that make me a horrible person? Maybe.
I also don't think that if the vast majority of the people in this homeless group of people would have tried to access healthcare from professionals, even if totally free, to treat their illness in this case. It isn't always cost, accessibility, and quality of care that keep people from seeking care. Sometimes, people just really don't want it.0 -
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
I would love to see the study/research behind this statistic. I would venture to say this is a result of other risk factors/life choices commonly shared among those who do not carry insurance (regardless of the reason). I find it hard to believe that care for a single incident alone is so inferior for those without health insurance they are 50% more likely to die.
The reasons listed were:
Having to delay getting care in the first place due to not being able to afford it.
More expensive, potentially life saving procedures are often not done on the uninsured that are done on the insured.
And the all around quality of care is simply lower if you are uninsured.
Here is a news article on the study: http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/10/uninsured-more-likely-to-die-in-hospital-study-finds/0 -
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
I would love to see the study/research behind this statistic. I would venture to say this is a result of other risk factors/life choices commonly shared among those who do not carry insurance (regardless of the reason). I find it hard to believe that care for a single incident alone is so inferior for those without health insurance they are 50% more likely to die.
The reasons listed were:
Having to delay getting care in the first place due to not being able to afford it.
More expensive, potentially life saving procedures are often not done on the uninsured that are done on the insured.
And the all around quality of care is simply lower if you are uninsured.
Here is a news article on the study: http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/10/uninsured-more-likely-to-die-in-hospital-study-finds/
The quality of my care is going to be lower than a politician, a celebrity, a sports star (even one in high school or college). Steve Jobs was able to get a transplant that pretty much no one else with the same illness as him could get. It is a harsh reality of the world that not everyone is able to get the same things. Should there be some basics that everyone gets? Sure, I don't have a problem with that, but the truth is that people with more resources are going to be able to get more, and they should, otherwise, what is the incentive to keep working for more?0 -
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
I would love to see the study/research behind this statistic. I would venture to say this is a result of other risk factors/life choices commonly shared among those who do not carry insurance (regardless of the reason). I find it hard to believe that care for a single incident alone is so inferior for those without health insurance they are 50% more likely to die.
The reasons listed were:
Having to delay getting care in the first place due to not being able to afford it.
More expensive, potentially life saving procedures are often not done on the uninsured that are done on the insured.
And the all around quality of care is simply lower if you are uninsured.
Here is a news article on the study: http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/10/uninsured-more-likely-to-die-in-hospital-study-finds/
The quality of my care is going to be lower than a politician, a celebrity, a sports star (even one in high school or college). Steve Jobs was able to get a transplant that pretty much no one else with the same illness as him could get. It is a harsh reality of the world that not everyone is able to get the same things. Should there be some basics that everyone gets? Sure, I don't have a problem with that, but the truth is that people with more resources are going to be able to get more, and they should, otherwise, what is the incentive to keep working for more?
It's fine if you want to live in a society where low wage workers are deprived of their lives thanks to poor healthcare but I find it both reprehensible from a moral standpoint and foolish from a practical standpoint. Why should anyone work if they can't afford even their lives much less a creature comfort now and then, money to send their children to school so they can have better lives, and the security of knowing they have a safe place to live and transportation to and from work? Smarter people will realize crime pays and will pursue antisocial activities that are more rewarding. And why shouldn't they?
But if we truly are going to be that type of society fine, let's at least know that about ourselves and not pretend that the poor are getting the same care as everyone else because they aren't.0 -
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
I would love to see the study/research behind this statistic. I would venture to say this is a result of other risk factors/life choices commonly shared among those who do not carry insurance (regardless of the reason). I find it hard to believe that care for a single incident alone is so inferior for those without health insurance they are 50% more likely to die.
The reasons listed were:
Having to delay getting care in the first place due to not being able to afford it.
More expensive, potentially life saving procedures are often not done on the uninsured that are done on the insured.
And the all around quality of care is simply lower if you are uninsured.
Here is a news article on the study: http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/10/uninsured-more-likely-to-die-in-hospital-study-finds/
The quality of my care is going to be lower than a politician, a celebrity, a sports star (even one in high school or college). Steve Jobs was able to get a transplant that pretty much no one else with the same illness as him could get. It is a harsh reality of the world that not everyone is able to get the same things. Should there be some basics that everyone gets? Sure, I don't have a problem with that, but the truth is that people with more resources are going to be able to get more, and they should, otherwise, what is the incentive to keep working for more?
It's fine if you want to live in a society where low wage workers are deprived of their lives thanks to poor healthcare but I find it both reprehensible from a moral standpoint and foolish from a practical standpoint. Why should anyone work if they can't afford even their lives much less a creature comfort now and then, money to send their children to school so they can have better lives, and the security of knowing they have a safe place to live and transportation to and from work? Smarter people will realize crime pays and will pursue antisocial activities that are more rewarding. And why shouldn't they?
But if we truly are going to be that type of society fine, let's at least know that about ourselves and not pretend that the poor are getting the same care as everyone else because they aren't.
I was a very low wage worker for a long time. My parents were low wage workers the entire time I was growing up. The first time we had any insurance at all was when I was in 8th grade and it was not good insurance at all. Even people with insurance and good jobs have to put off medical procedures until they can afford them. I would love to have no worries about medical bills or procedures. I've been in the position that I had to declare bankruptcy due to medical bills, even with good medical coverage. There have been societies that try to address the issues you stated above, to make everyone equal, to make sure that every citizen, regardless of their input to society, have the same things as everyone else. They fail. It inhibits growth, people aren't happy, and the society fails. Life isn't equal. It never has been.0 -
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
I would love to see the study/research behind this statistic. I would venture to say this is a result of other risk factors/life choices commonly shared among those who do not carry insurance (regardless of the reason). I find it hard to believe that care for a single incident alone is so inferior for those without health insurance they are 50% more likely to die.
The reasons listed were:
Having to delay getting care in the first place due to not being able to afford it.
More expensive, potentially life saving procedures are often not done on the uninsured that are done on the insured.
And the all around quality of care is simply lower if you are uninsured.
Here is a news article on the study: http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/10/uninsured-more-likely-to-die-in-hospital-study-finds/
The quality of my care is going to be lower than a politician, a celebrity, a sports star (even one in high school or college). Steve Jobs was able to get a transplant that pretty much no one else with the same illness as him could get. It is a harsh reality of the world that not everyone is able to get the same things. Should there be some basics that everyone gets? Sure, I don't have a problem with that, but the truth is that people with more resources are going to be able to get more, and they should, otherwise, what is the incentive to keep working for more?
It's fine if you want to live in a society where low wage workers are deprived of their lives thanks to poor healthcare but I find it both reprehensible from a moral standpoint and foolish from a practical standpoint. Why should anyone work if they can't afford even their lives much less a creature comfort now and then, money to send their children to school so they can have better lives, and the security of knowing they have a safe place to live and transportation to and from work? Smarter people will realize crime pays and will pursue antisocial activities that are more rewarding. And why shouldn't they?
But if we truly are going to be that type of society fine, let's at least know that about ourselves and not pretend that the poor are getting the same care as everyone else because they aren't.
I was a very low wage worker for a long time. My parents were low wage workers the entire time I was growing up. The first time we had any insurance at all was when I was in 8th grade and it was not good insurance at all. Even people with insurance and good jobs have to put off medical procedures until they can afford them. I would love to have no worries about medical bills or procedures. I've been in the position that I had to declare bankruptcy due to medical bills, even with good medical coverage. There have been societies that try to address the issues you stated above, to make everyone equal, to make sure that every citizen, regardless of their input to society, have the same things as everyone else. They fail. It inhibits growth, people aren't happy, and the society fails. Life isn't equal. It never has been.
There is a difference between making everyone have the same things and making sure everyone has the same opportunities. Currently, the deck is stacked against the least fortunate among us.0 -
Speaking of healthcare, though, just read today a study showing that an uninsured person is about %50 more likely to die in the hospital of a stroke or heart attack than an insured person.
Euthanasia. It is alive and well in America.
I would love to see the study/research behind this statistic. I would venture to say this is a result of other risk factors/life choices commonly shared among those who do not carry insurance (regardless of the reason). I find it hard to believe that care for a single incident alone is so inferior for those without health insurance they are 50% more likely to die.
The reasons listed were:
Having to delay getting care in the first place due to not being able to afford it.
More expensive, potentially life saving procedures are often not done on the uninsured that are done on the insured.
And the all around quality of care is simply lower if you are uninsured.
Here is a news article on the study: http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/10/uninsured-more-likely-to-die-in-hospital-study-finds/
The quality of my care is going to be lower than a politician, a celebrity, a sports star (even one in high school or college). Steve Jobs was able to get a transplant that pretty much no one else with the same illness as him could get. It is a harsh reality of the world that not everyone is able to get the same things. Should there be some basics that everyone gets? Sure, I don't have a problem with that, but the truth is that people with more resources are going to be able to get more, and they should, otherwise, what is the incentive to keep working for more?
It's fine if you want to live in a society where low wage workers are deprived of their lives thanks to poor healthcare but I find it both reprehensible from a moral standpoint and foolish from a practical standpoint. Why should anyone work if they can't afford even their lives much less a creature comfort now and then, money to send their children to school so they can have better lives, and the security of knowing they have a safe place to live and transportation to and from work? Smarter people will realize crime pays and will pursue antisocial activities that are more rewarding. And why shouldn't they?
But if we truly are going to be that type of society fine, let's at least know that about ourselves and not pretend that the poor are getting the same care as everyone else because they aren't.
I was a very low wage worker for a long time. My parents were low wage workers the entire time I was growing up. The first time we had any insurance at all was when I was in 8th grade and it was not good insurance at all. Even people with insurance and good jobs have to put off medical procedures until they can afford them. I would love to have no worries about medical bills or procedures. I've been in the position that I had to declare bankruptcy due to medical bills, even with good medical coverage. There have been societies that try to address the issues you stated above, to make everyone equal, to make sure that every citizen, regardless of their input to society, have the same things as everyone else. They fail. It inhibits growth, people aren't happy, and the society fails. Life isn't equal. It never has been.
They don't fail, they have the highest standards of living in the world. Look at Norway. Most productive workforce, excellent quality of life.0 -
They don't fail, they have the highest standards of living in the world. Look at Norway. Most productive workforce, excellent quality of life.
Oh Mara! You are going to make me debate you about Norway again aren't ya?!0 -
They don't fail, they have the highest standards of living in the world. Look at Norway. Most productive workforce, excellent quality of life.
Oh Mara! You are going to make me debate you about Norway again aren't ya?!
:laugh:
Nope, I'll just say this:
When we are #1 instead of #16, I will concede that our system, government, and economic culture is #1. Until then, we need to look at what other countries are doing better than us.
Inequality-adjusted HDI
Main article: List of countries by inequality-adjusted HDI
The Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI)[8] is a "measure of the average level of human development of people in a society once inequality is taken into account."[9]
Note: The green arrows (Increase), red arrows (Decrease), and blue dashes (Steady) represent changes in rank when compared to the 2012 value (see source - pg. 152)
Norway 0.894 (Steady)
Australia 0.864 (Steady)
Sweden 0.859 (Increase 3)
Netherlands 0.857 (Steady)
Germany 0.856 (Steady)
Ireland 0.850 (Steady)
Switzerland 0.849 (Increase 1)
Iceland 0.848 (Increase 3)
Denmark 0.845 (Increase 3)
Slovenia 0.840 (Increase 7)
Finland 0.839 (Increase 6)
Austria 0.837 (Increase 3)
Canada 0.832 (Decrease 4)
Czech Republic 0.826 (Increase 9)
Belgium 0.825 (Decrease 1)
United States 0.821 (Decrease 13)0 -
They don't fail, they have the highest standards of living in the world. Look at Norway. Most productive workforce, excellent quality of life.
Oh Mara! You are going to make me debate you about Norway again aren't ya?!
:laugh:
Nope, I'll just say this:
When we are #1 instead of #16, I will concede that our system, government, and economic culture is #1. Until then, we need to look at what other countries are doing better than us.
Inequality-adjusted HDI
Main article: List of countries by inequality-adjusted HDI
The Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI)[8] is a "measure of the average level of human development of people in a society once inequality is taken into account."[9]
Note: The green arrows (Increase), red arrows (Decrease), and blue dashes (Steady) represent changes in rank when compared to the 2012 value (see source - pg. 152)
Norway 0.894 (Steady)
Australia 0.864 (Steady)
Sweden 0.859 (Increase 3)
Netherlands 0.857 (Steady)
Germany 0.856 (Steady)
Ireland 0.850 (Steady)
Switzerland 0.849 (Increase 1)
Iceland 0.848 (Increase 3)
Denmark 0.845 (Increase 3)
Slovenia 0.840 (Increase 7)
Finland 0.839 (Increase 6)
Austria 0.837 (Increase 3)
Canada 0.832 (Decrease 4)
Czech Republic 0.826 (Increase 9)
Belgium 0.825 (Decrease 1)
United States 0.821 (Decrease 13)
So you're comparing a country with a population of about 5 million people to a country with 315 million......Where does Brazil rank on this list? They have a population close to 200 Million and universal healthcare.0 -
They don't fail, they have the highest standards of living in the world. Look at Norway. Most productive workforce, excellent quality of life.
Oh Mara! You are going to make me debate you about Norway again aren't ya?!
:laugh:
Nope, I'll just say this:
When we are #1 instead of #16, I will concede that our system, government, and economic culture is #1. Until then, we need to look at what other countries are doing better than us.
Inequality-adjusted HDI
Main article: List of countries by inequality-adjusted HDI
The Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI)[8] is a "measure of the average level of human development of people in a society once inequality is taken into account."[9]
Note: The green arrows (Increase), red arrows (Decrease), and blue dashes (Steady) represent changes in rank when compared to the 2012 value (see source - pg. 152)
Norway 0.894 (Steady)
Australia 0.864 (Steady)
Sweden 0.859 (Increase 3)
Netherlands 0.857 (Steady)
Germany 0.856 (Steady)
Ireland 0.850 (Steady)
Switzerland 0.849 (Increase 1)
Iceland 0.848 (Increase 3)
Denmark 0.845 (Increase 3)
Slovenia 0.840 (Increase 7)
Finland 0.839 (Increase 6)
Austria 0.837 (Increase 3)
Canada 0.832 (Decrease 4)
Czech Republic 0.826 (Increase 9)
Belgium 0.825 (Decrease 1)
United States 0.821 (Decrease 13)
So you're comparing a country with a population of about 5 million people to a country with 315 million......Where does Brazil rank on this list? They have a population close to 200 Million and universal healthcare.
I'm also comparing a country with more workers and vastly more resources. And we are America, we must be #1, we must be the best, the happiest, the smartest! We must not fail because we are the best country in the world and no one must be permitted to surpass our glorious and happy peoples!
0 -
They don't fail, they have the highest standards of living in the world. Look at Norway. Most productive workforce, excellent quality of life.
Oh Mara! You are going to make me debate you about Norway again aren't ya?!
:laugh:
Nope, I'll just say this:
When we are #1 instead of #16, I will concede that our system, government, and economic culture is #1. Until then, we need to look at what other countries are doing better than us.
Inequality-adjusted HDI
Main article: List of countries by inequality-adjusted HDI
The Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI)[8] is a "measure of the average level of human development of people in a society once inequality is taken into account."[9]
Note: The green arrows (Increase), red arrows (Decrease), and blue dashes (Steady) represent changes in rank when compared to the 2012 value (see source - pg. 152)
Norway 0.894 (Steady)
Australia 0.864 (Steady)
Sweden 0.859 (Increase 3)
Netherlands 0.857 (Steady)
Germany 0.856 (Steady)
Ireland 0.850 (Steady)
Switzerland 0.849 (Increase 1)
Iceland 0.848 (Increase 3)
Denmark 0.845 (Increase 3)
Slovenia 0.840 (Increase 7)
Finland 0.839 (Increase 6)
Austria 0.837 (Increase 3)
Canada 0.832 (Decrease 4)
Czech Republic 0.826 (Increase 9)
Belgium 0.825 (Decrease 1)
United States 0.821 (Decrease 13)
So you're comparing a country with a population of about 5 million people to a country with 315 million......Where does Brazil rank on this list? They have a population close to 200 Million and universal healthcare.
I'm also comparing a country with more workers and vastly more resources. And we are America, we must be #1, we must be the best, the happiest, the smartest! We must not fail because we are the best country in the world and no one must be permitted to surpass our glorious and happy peoples!
lol
All true but you still didnt answer the question. 0
This discussion has been closed.